Donald Trump has been elected president of the United States.In an extremely narrow sense, I’m not that surprised by the outcome, since polling — to a greater extent than the conventional wisdom acknowledged — had shown a fairly competitive race with critical weaknesses for Clinton in the Electoral College. It’s possible, perhaps even likely, that Clinton will eventually win the popular vote as more votes come in from California.
- Nate Silver

Oh, shut up, Nate. You were wrong. You were wrong from the start. You were wrong about the primaries. You were wrong about the election. No one should put any faith in your erroneous models ever again.

Keep in mind that Silver not only called a 72 percent chance of a Clinton victory, but actually INCREASED it from 65 percent on the day of the election. This isn't "statistical science"; it's not even "statistical analysis". It is nothing more than postmortem media CYA.

dh, our resident statistical expert, will likely see it the same way. Last night, he wrote:

I would conclude so far:

1. There is a such thing as a reluctant Trump supporter, who was missed by the vast of polls, and was undercounted by as much as 4-5% in some states (and maybe nationally, we'll see on that).

2. There is no such thing as NeverTrump, the party advantage numbers are exactly where they always have been (prelim but looks solid) - 90/10 party advantage to each candidate.

3. Trump out-campaigned Clinton vastly, and it has really shown. The crowd intensity and star power and magnetism he brought out has apparently paid off in ways that I did not correctly anticipate.

I am sure the numbers will continue to firm up, but at 11EST that's how it looks. If the polling comes out as bad as it looks right now, the entire industry may be upended from the roots and shaken out.

The entire polling industry needs to be upended. In the light of the next day, it is readily apparent that the polling actually came out worse than it looked last night. The debate between dh and I was never personal, it was a conceptual battle of predictive analytical models.

And it is now very clear that the old media models are now outmoded. This should not be a surprise, considering that the shift from ideology politics to identity politics is only beginning. The transformation from liberal vs conservative to non-white vs white is now underway, but it is far from complete.

151 Comments:

"Oh, shut up, Nate. You were wrong. You were wrong from the start. You were wrong about the primaries. You were wrong about the election. No one should put any faith in your erroneous models ever again."Sumbitch, you cut Nate down so low low the ants can't piss on him.

I was watching the fivethirtyeight blog. Silver's crew was very slow to acknowledge what was obvious to anyone looking at other projections. I thought the New York Times' continuously updating models were very interesting. They spotted the trends long before anyone else, and were quickest to identify that the conventional wisdom was unwise.

The pundits didn't realise Trump is actually charismatic, because he is orange and none of the things they repeat to make each other angrier sounded like something a charismatic guy would say.

"The transformation from liberal vs conservative to non-white vs white is now underway"

The Liberals created this monster, like so many others; they had thought they could simply genocide their opposition away - and yes, deliberately flooding an ethnicity with another, or destroying a culture's language, icons, symbols and religion, are defined by the UN as genocide.

How many of the things they claim to be frightened of did they first conjure? Black disadvantage? The "war on women"? The alt-right and the ascendant politics of identity?

They dismantled the gentleman, husband and father, and got boy-children and PUAs.They dismantled the family and got orphans.They dismantled the common ground of the Church and the Nation and they got tribal war.

They dismantled the gentleman, husband and father, and got boy-children and PUAs.They dismantled the family and got orphans.They dismantled the common ground of the Church and the Nation and they got tribal war.

In the name of God, WHAT DID THEY EXPECT?

"Do not call up that which you cannot put down.", you fucking idiots.

Well said.

We have our Trump. We have Congress. Stock futures are in turmoil (maybe the game of chicken is over?)

The problems the hoax media and Nate Silver have is the exact same as that which Susan Estridge had back during Bush v Kerry. They simply believed their own bullshit. It takes a special kind of stupid for that, the kind that Gruber counted on to get Obamacare shoved up all our asses. The stupid shitlibs can always be counted on for their stupidity.

Can anyone name a single Sociology of Political "Science" ('Expediency Studies') department anywhere in the West predicting either Brexit or Trump victories?

Why then are they still publicly subsidised anywhere? Starve them of taxpayer fees. If stupid 18 yr olds still want to get into thousands of debt to become little cultural Marxists, let them. Just no more tabs picked up by the rest of us who have to listen to their inane 'intersectional' drivel.

As others have pointed out, The hoax media makes this sweeter for us and devastating to their side. Everyone was giddy about an "early night" Then realization sets in, then the EC isn't even close and Trump takes "safe" states like WI, PA and possibly MI.

They were convinced this was a cake walk by the wall to wall propaganda. It is much harder to recover from defeat when you thought you already had won.

I do not claim to have known anything in advance, and I made no predictions. I was in fact yesterday fearful that the conventional wisdom was correct.

But, at the same time, in these forums, I found information that, now, afterwards, makes sense. People here said that in state after state, the Republicans were setting new all-time records in new voter registration this summer. In state after state, also, we kept seeing Hillary unable to fill up a modest sized elementary school cafeteria with her supporters at her so-called "rallies," whereas Trump drew adoring crowds of tens of thousands wherever he went.

Now--afterwards--this, plus the revelations from Wikileaks about the deliberate manipulation and fabrication of poll data, make it clear that all the people telling us about the unstoppable impending coronation of Queen Cackling Cankles were lying through their teeth to us, and had been the whole time.

And one of the conclusions I have reached is that I should never believe any of these people again.

Can you imagine the anguish of these people, knowing that it doesn't matter what they delete, Trump will soon have control of the NSA and they have it all?

If this race has shown us anything, it's just how interlocked the "elite" are at many different levels. While obvious felony breaches of security may not gain a lot of traction with the majority of people, the pedophilia certainly will. Lock them up in general population as convicted pedophiles and let nature take its course.

I know it is not much of a sample size, but nearly every Trump supporter I spoke with about the polling over the last month or so said essentially the same thing: I don't even bother to answer poll calls anymore.

And although I don't know whether it is helpful to ones cause, I hung up or misled every pollster who called the house.

Is it just me or was there not an incredibly high number of robo calls and pollsters out this election season?

Carthago delenda est. Now it's time to pole them under and sow salt in the furrows. Keep working on those Wikileak mails. There is stuff on there that will put the whole coven in a hole and keep themthere.

(I posted this on last night's thread, but it turns out it should be here.)

On the one hand, I've been saying for a few months that the pollsters were in a bad spot. I suspected they were getting a lot of what sounded to them like, "Me and Ma haven't voted since 1984, but we're gonna get out there and vote for Mr. Trump, because he really cares about Murica."

If you're a young, hip urbanite working at a polling company, do you count that person? If you get 50 people like that in your sample of 1000, how many of them do you count, if any? Your system says those people aren't "likely voters," so they don't show up in your favorite models. Also, you simply don't know people like that in real life, so you're hesitant to believe they exist, especially in the numbers you're starting to hear.

So I understand their problem. But at some point, if you expect people to respect your prognostigatory ability, you have to be able to see past your biases and expectations, and process new information and make sense of it. At some point they should have recognized that those people were real and weren't going away -- and before the last weekend. If nothing else, they should have started hedging their bets by releasing two sets of numbers: "likely voters" and "self-identified voters." The second number might not be as accurate in a typical election, but it could be more accurate in an election that draws in new voting blocks or represents shifts like Reagan Democrats.

All that assumes they were trying to be accurate, of course. I don't think that's entirely true; I think most of them were also push-pulling for Hillary. (Nate Silver certainly was.) But even the supposed right-leaning pollsters missed a lot of this, so it's not just about partisanship. There's a real problem with polling methods that they rely too heavily on assumptions based on the status quo. Anyone can predict that what happened before will happen again in pretty much the same patterns. It takes real skill and insight to spot that something new is happening.

Check out Patton Pigface Oswalt's twitter feed. Much kek. Oh, how I have dreamed of five minutes in an octagonal cage with Oswalt. I would remind him of his high school days when the jocks would atomic wedgie him, and stuff him in his own gym locker.

I'm sitting here watching MSNBC, my husband and I had a bet whether or not Mika would show up today, but I am hoping that whomever Trump listened to in the Alt Right that he keeps them close. I can't believe the gall of Scarborough, Brokaw and the rest all listing what Trump needs to do now. The hubris is beyond belief. Vox I hope you have sent Trump a signed copy of SJW's Always Lie.

As a "Boomer",the group that voted in highest percentages for Trump, I am blessed to have participated in both the Reagan and the Trump political revolutions! Make America Great Again! GO TRUMP! Glory be to our gracious God who has raised up this great and unlikely man! Please protect him. body, heart, and soul.

The media is still at it. The NYTimes refuses to call Michigan and Arizona even though Trump has won both states and the election. I think they are trying to downplay the size of Trump's win while simultaneously keeping up with the popular vote totals that show a slight HRC margin right now.

As a "Boomer",the group that voted in highest percentages for Trump, I am blessed to have participated in both the Reagan and the Trump political revolutions! Make America Great Again! GO TRUMP! Glory be to our gracious God who has raised up this great and unlikely man! Please protect him. body, heart, and soul.

The Ayatollah just said some nice things about Trump's populism being a reaction to reality by US voters. I wonder if this means we're going to shift our alliance with ISIS/Saudi Arabia over to Russia/Syria/Iran and against ISIS.

The Ayatollah quote: In the video, Khamenei referenced that last presidential debate, saying of Trump: “Interestingly, the one who was more outspoken was welcomed by people more. Since that man was more outspoken, spoke more frankly, [the] American people paid more attention to him. His opponent accused him of being populist; populism, why populism? Because people were hearing his words and realized that they [the revelations] were true. They were seeing [the] same things in their real life.”

I saw it in the CNN "live election coverage", November 9, 2016 5:13AM, so I can give only a temporary link to the comments:http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/07/politics/live-election-results-coverage/index.html

Trump should just refuse to talk to the media except for Breitbart and a few reasonable conservatives. They didn't do their job when he was campaigning and won't do it when he is president. Just invite the old media to a press conference once a month and let them talk to Alex Jones after he has gone without sleep for a few days.

As I have said repeatedly over the past year, people will not answer polls, or answer them honestly, if they can lose their jobs or face social disapproval by supporting a particular candidate. And parts of the electorate cannot be reached any more by polling, period. Martin Armstrong, Greg Cochran, and I all predicted Trump because the country was looking for a peaceful revolution, and with an 85% turnout rate, highest in history, that's what we got.

Cail Corishev wrote:(I posted this on last night's thread, but it turns out it should be here.)

On the one hand, I've been saying for a few months that the pollsters were in a bad spot. I suspected they were getting a lot of what sounded to them like, "Me and Ma haven't voted since 1984, but we're gonna get out there and vote for Mr. Trump, because he really cares about Murica."

If you're a young, hip urbanite working at a polling company, do you count that person? If you get 50 people like that in your sample of 1000, how many of them do you count, if any? Your system says those people aren't "likely voters," so they don't show up in your favorite models. Also, you simply don't know people like that in real life, so you're hesitant to believe they exist, especially in the numbers you're starting to hear.

So I understand their problem. But at some point, if you expect people to respect your prognostigatory ability, you have to be able to see past your biases and expectations, and process new information and make sense of it. At some point they should have recognized that those people were real and weren't going away -- and before the last weekend. If nothing else, they should have started hedging their bets by releasing two sets of numbers: "likely voters" and "self-identified voters." The second number might not be as accurate in a typical election, but it could be more accurate in an election that draws in new voting blocks or represents shifts like Reagan Democrats.

All that assumes they were trying to be accurate, of course. I don't think that's entirely true; I think most of them were also push-pulling for Hillary. (Nate Silver certainly was.) But even the supposed right-leaning pollsters missed a lot of this, so it's not just about partisanship. There's a real problem with polling methods that they rely too heavily on assumptions based on the status quo. Anyone can predict that what happened before will happen again in pretty much the same patterns. It takes real skill and insight to spot that something new is happening.

This happens everywhere all the time. Analysts at every company make this mistake. It's easy to see a trend, it's easy to put together a model based on historical data. It's hard to understand the underlying assumptions, how they can be wrong, and if the person reporting the data were so inclined how the data can be gamed.

Working in a manufacturing environment I can't count the number of times I heard plant managers praised for improving their variances while looking at their inventory write offs going through the roof. Many people assume the problems aren't related but they always are. It takes wisdom and a solid understanding of the variables to spot it and that skill is rare.

From the The Last Refugee site: THE MEDIA DIDN’T GET IT WRONG – The pollsters did not work from the wrong data set; the media pollsters, consultants and professional political class did not work from the wrong assumptions, or use the incorrect baselines….. THEY LIED.

Enjoy today. It will be seen as one of the most important moments in human history. But we still have a problem. So don't celebrate too, too long. Problem is, the most evil people of all time still have control of the executive branch and the federal government, until January 20. We still have a long, long way to go. Folks, realize this: Today, to sooth their anguish, these ghouls are probably raping, torturing, murdering, and cooking more babies than they usually do. I understand the ugly math, how moving too early to save the children being consumed now could jeopardize many more children if it fails, or backfires. But, then again, maybe they are just going to kill and eat a bunch of kids today, and then scrub their current infernal venues and move to new, safer evil sanctuaries. In that case, it would be imperative for an unignorably large mass of peaceful protestors to surround these places, block anyone from exiting or entering, especially children, and call the nation's attention to their abominable existence.

As well as the relief and the hope and the faith and all the other good feelings I have today, I also got to enjoy some appreciation from my friends: they were all convinced yesterday that it was over and they were very downcast. But I never wavered. I told them ignore the polls, ignore the odds, ignore the media, he's going to do it.

(I honestly did tense up a bit before the polls started closing, but I think that's natural.)

Was it Scott Adams who said the media gave Obama a full 15 points in the 2008 election? We can assume the media were doing just as much if not more to get Hillary into office this time around. Accounting for the media influence, and no doubt some considerable cheating, that means Trump won handily.

As expected, my social media feed is full of wailing and gnashing of teeth from the usual quarters. What was confusing, however, was the reaction of liberal females. The men are saying things like, "What a train wreck" or "What the hell just happened?" But to a person, the women are saying things like, "So scared!" "What will I tell my children in the morning??" and "So scared for my children!" I was genuinely confused by this -- what specifically are they scared of? what do they think is going to happen to their children as a result of Trump winning? -- until someone explained it to me: They have no control over their emotions. They have little reference for disappointment and mistake it for fear. Also, fear gets more sympathy than disappointment, so that is a go to emotion for them to use as a weapon. So, what happened to the "strong, independent woman"? In any case, it's obvious that the media are responsible for setting up a false expectation. Given how much they were blatantly on Hillary's side, it's no wonder the disappointment is so extreme.

Also, I dunno if it's a generational thing, but why on earth are these mothers planning to upset their young children over something they can't possibly understand and have no control over? What do they think that will accomplish? When I was a young kid, my parents were very politically active. Unlike most blowhards, my family actually did move to Canada after the political disasters of Vietnam and Nixon, and continued to do work for socialist causes up there for a time. However, in spite of all this, they did not involve us kids in politics until we were teenagers and could at least understand some of the context. So, is this a Generation Y thing, to unload the cares of the world onto young children?

I cannot even begin to express how happy I am this morning waking up to a "President Elect Trump" and not to a "President elect Clinton".

I am going to spend a solid hour just reading through the Twitter feeds of various media people from last night, starting when it looked like he might lose Florida on to the glorious end. I am going to enjoy their misery.

Speaking of hoaxing media, does anyone have a link to one of those "Trump will never..." checklists? You know the list of all the things the media and Never Trumpers claimed he couldn't or wouldn't do?

"but I am hoping that whomever Trump listened to in the Alt Right that he keeps them close. I can't believe the gall of Scarborough, Brokaw and the rest all listing what Trump needs to do now. The hubris is beyond belief. Vox I hope you have sent Trump a signed copy of SJW's Always Lie."

On the other hand, these Trafalgar guys are looking pretty good. They came up with a model that tries to estimate those who don't answer polls or don't answer them accurately. And it looks like they're one of the few who got it right.

One outright lie we shouldn't forget because it was a while back: the claim from some conservatives that as many as 12 million of Trump's voters in the primaries were Democrats crossing over to set him up so Hillary could defeat him easily. If that had been true, she would have. It was pure wishful thinking and propaganda meant to demoralize.

IMVHO we must thank, profusely at that, the You go girls for doubling down on crazy white lesbian scolding speak that was basically the entire Clinton campaign. Without crazy lesbians and satanists like Podesta where would be today?

From now on, when people discuss Presidential elections, they should discuss the predictive model of a historian Allan Lichtman, who has been correct since 1984, and predicted a Trump victory; political science professor Helmut Norpoth , who has been correct since 1996, and predicted a Trump victory; and computer programmer Sanjiv Rai, who has been correct since 2004, and predicted a Trump victory.

Realize, they are merely the 4th or 5th generation to be molded from birth by an increasingly ascendant cultural hegemony the settings of which are controlled by an increasingly more centralized network of satanic globalists. We have all been spoiled rotten since, oh, radio was invented?

Now would be a good time to reconsider Infinite Jest as the work of a prophetic crypto-conservative.

Haven't seen the breakdowns, but if commenters are correct and boomers made the difference in this election, then I'm proud to be a boomer for the first time. So much to take in... I'm so amazed, I can barely type a coherent sentence.

This evil must be as old as the Fabians, at least, right? Well, the Fabians have gained gradual control over our schools, our arts, our news, our minds. We might have saved ourselves from whatever they had planned after waiting patiently for so long. They have these Millennials utterly gaslit. I half suspect that Affirmative Consent was eventually going to be the monsters' pivot toward normalizing child consent. And they would have corrupted the kids enough, brainwashed and stupefied them so thoroughly, that many of the kids would enthusiastically sign up. Christ. This fucking timeline needs to keep changing for the better. Gonna take a lot of work to deprogram entire generations, half of each generatiom anyway, at least. Deprogram not unlike an escaped Scientology victim. They are that deluded. And, un-be-fucking-lievably, they've been deluded by the same creeps, ultimately...Crowley, Hubbard, Podesta, what's the difference.

There will be a few changes at cuckservative organizations. For example, at NRO Rich Lowry's days are numbered. William Kristol will have to find some semi-permanent job in Israel, since he proved to be such an embarrassment. Krauthammer will still get the occasional gig, being crippled and all, but his income stream will also decrease markedly.

Of course, all of this will be cosmetic; like the closet leftists they really are, they will double down, damning with faint praise anything Trump does in office.

Truly these people are reprehensible; now's the time to excoriate their asses and never let up.

@Cail "On the one hand, I've been saying for a few months that the pollsters were in a bad spot. I suspected they were getting a lot of what sounded to them like, "Me and Ma haven't voted since 1984, but we're gonna get out there and vote for Mr. Trump, because he really cares about Murica.""

The thing is, these are exactly the people never covered in polls. Polls are done against those who vote. This was my first Presidential election since I was burned by Bush 42 (voted him over Clinton, then he sent men into Somalia after he lost. I knew they were going to die for nothing involving the USA - I predicted it the day I heard it - because I could see the character of Clinton). I registered and voted in Illinois even though I was sure Trump would lose here - I also influenced my mother to vote for him back in Michigan. Even if Trump only slows the slide off the cliff, you fight for all its worth. Children are always watching - inspire the next generation and teach them to love freedom.

THE MEDIA DIDN’T GET IT WRONG – The pollsters did not work from the wrong data set; the media pollsters, consultants and professional political class did not work from the wrong assumptions, or use the incorrect baselines….. THEY LIED.

It's not supposed to matter if people lie; the model is supposed to correct that. Most of the pollster models, including the one I follow closest, aligns the ratio of votes award from polls based on the median error from prior cycles. So if the trend for polls show the ultimate winner doing +1% better than the polls, that is weighted into the mix. 538 doesn't release their formula, but this is probably in their model as well.

The data hasn't actually firmed up, so I can't say exactly where the really popular models went wrong, except to say they undercounted Trump supporters by as much as 10% in some battle ground states (Ohio is looking to be extremely poorly polled). At least one battleground state were within the final MoE, but largely the entire run of battleground states ended up outside of the margin of polling error.

One theory that a lot of people here espoused was essentially a conspiracy. I think we have strong evidence that media outlets were in the tank for Clinton - from the leaked questions, to softball handling, and all that. I had previously ruled out the idea that polling companies were also in the tank in a serious way for Clinton but at this point there is something that is interesting to me: Clinton tweeted at around 6PM EST that no matter what happened, she was proud. That smells like to me a person who had just found out that the air was being let out of her balloon and it was too late to fix. Was she faking it till she made it? Did the internal exit polls finally show the true measure of her loss coming out?

Ultimately I will be looking the voter engagement, the snapshots from exit polling shows convincingly that Trump out performed in many groups - his supposed woman problem wasn't nearly as bad predicted.

Finally, Team Clinton is the worst electoral team in the history of the activity. She has stayed with the same group of losers for 20 years - the same group who never told her that running her own e-mail server was stupid, that she could deal with scandals piecemeal the old way, and that trying to avoid talking policy with Trump and going slug for slug was a winning strategy. Zingers and tweets were never going to win this, and it's pathetic the effort they put forward.

Trumps most hard line opposition in the entire race was from the political consultant class, who have the most to lose. Trump didn't use any of it. He used his own deep data firm from overseas, he used almost no polling, he used no big money contributions, and his PACs were basically cut lose from his campaign (the way the law is supposed to work). The consultant class and the media bet big against Trump and have lost totally. This election shows strongly that the message is what matters - money is a deep and distant second way down the line. All of Clinton's oodles of money and connections and the network of operatives were not able to counteract a powerful message.

You are confusing the tool with the individual using the tool. DH knows his numbers. That doesn't mean that he always knows when they apply and when they don't.

dh is, among other - less disreputable - things, a recovering liberal. If I had to characterize liberals with one and only one attribute, it would be difficulty comprehending cause and effect. They are prone to linear thinking.

dh saw the election as just a linear extension of previous elections. But the weight of the... failures, of both establishment parties, caused things to go plastic. Non-linear. The old assumptions didn't hold.

His only real sin was hubris. But then that is the common sin of leftists. Thinking the world gives a damn about their theories...

"Ultimately I will be looking the voter engagement, the snapshots from exit polling shows convincingly that Trump out performed in many groups - his supposed woman problem wasn't nearly as bad predicted."

Hillary got 53% of women from what I read. That is an absolute landslide for Trump, given that they expected 60% to go for Her. I, along with many others, predicted he would do far better with women than the idiotic assumptions. Team Alpha trumps Team Woman when the Woman is an unlikable bitch.

Years ago I came across an article in a local paper authored by the (((editor))) of said paper. I was aghast at how nauseatingly inaccurate and ignorant the f*cker was about the basic fundamentals with respect to issue he was "thinking" about. Kind of analogous to arguing that the laws of thermodynamics could be circumvented.

So my irritation propelled me to demolish this asshole. Now, I knew my rebuttal was going to go straight to him; it was a small paper and he was the editor, after all. So I took a gamble to see if he would pass the shit test. Lo and behold: what did I see in the next publication: the f*cker carefully revised his arguments and said "This is the forecast/result that I correctly predicted would happen" using my reasoning and logic to back up his revised position - he argued the exact opposite position on nonexistent principles!!! . The (((f*cking))) went on further to use my selectively cherished vocab that I kept in reserve and used sparingly in discourse! I didn't give a sh*t about the re-appropriation of my logical reasoning as I did the use of the vocab I put out; "At least open up a f*cking thesaurus!" I thought - pretty friggin brazen plagiarism.

A young and (((upstart))) that was liked by many and had a lot going for him. I too thought this punk would one day be fast tracked because of his (((excellent credentials))).

" 55. Blogger Mr.MantraMan November 09, 2016 7:48 AM Where do I send my resume for the job of Minister of Deportation?"

Or how about the Secretary of Do Your Job and Follow the Law.Or Secretary Of Justify Your Budget For Real Or Get Defunded.

But what I really want to see, when a journalist, , steps foot on White House grounds their ID badge will be a big fat spongebob-yellow star with a single word on it. The word being "LIAR". I would grudgingly accept two words, "PROFESSIONAL LIAR". And I guess they get a number so they don't get confused for another liar.

It would also be official policy that they be lied to, repeatedly, for their whole visit. Gaslighting as official media relations policy. On second thought telling them the unvarnished truth and forcing them to report it verbatim and without spin would be much more painful.

"71. Anonymous RabidRatel November 09, 2016 8:15 AM Mr.MantraMan wrote:Without the religion of Political Correctness the Left crumbles.

... the feet a mixture of clay and iron ..."

There are several ways to look at that verse.

The obvious one right now is to see the iron as the people of the west that built western civilization and the clay as everyone else. For us that means all the 3rd world migrants in Europe and North America are the clay. Europe and North America are the two feet.

Just remember, when the feet are smashed the clay crumbles to dust and the iron will still be iron. Don't get too emotionally invested in being part of a foot.

Hillary got 53% of women from what I read. That is an absolute landslide for Trump, given that they expected 60% to go for Her.

This is exactly it. The theory was that women would shatter the ceiling for Clinton. There was apparently literally a glass ceiling they were going to smash in NYC last night at her rally site. Literally a glass ceiling that was going to be smashed.

I really don't know any women who were excited to pull the stick for her. The ones I know did were doing so out of resignation.

dh wrote:THE MEDIA DIDN’T GET IT WRONG – The pollsters did not work from the wrong data set; the media pollsters, consultants and professional political class did not work from the wrong assumptions, or use the incorrect baselines….. THEY LIED.

It's not supposed to matter if people lie; the model is supposed to correct that. Most of the pollster models, including the one I follow closest, aligns the ratio of votes award from polls based on the median error from prior cycles. So if the trend for polls show the ultimate winner doing +1% better than the polls, that is weighted into the mix. 538 doesn't release their formula, but this is probably in their model as well.

As I stated earlier. You can model to your hearts content but they are not a be all end all. You have to have the wisdom and understanding to recognize that the real world situation is behaving differently than you have seen in the past. The refusal to recognize this, and the absolute faith in your model is the downfall of many an analyst.

The Upper Midwest and Rust Belt doomed Hillary. It was telling when the first swing state that was called for Trump was Ohio, even before the southeastern states. That should've been a clue right there.

I was rather surprised to see Wisconsin fall in line behind Trump, since it was pretty viciously NeverTrump during the primaries. Heck, he even came within 100k of getting Minnesota. But that's what it was: falling in line.

I should also point out that it was heavily-white states that boosted Trump, whereas Western states with a lot of Mexicans went for Clinton, including Nevada and Colorado. The GOP is becoming more and more obviously the White Party, and the Mexicans more and more obviously identifying as an anti-White group rather than a White ethnic (like Italians) that optimists have been hoping they become.

Sleuth around the Podesta data dumps for Latin or German language. Some of these demons are probably extremely well-educated artfags and teachers reenacting ancient Greek mysteries which happened in the woods and which were Never Discussed, lol, I wonder why, but which can be glimpsed in Euripides. The contemporary heirs of those ghoulish rituals could be people corrupted as kids at elite classical schools in after school groups like the one featured in Donna Tartt's Secret History. Think of the profile pic for Alefantis's Instagram.

"Don't let up. Don't show them any mercy. Not now, and not ever, because none will be shown to you."

The Luegenpresse, the leftist organizers, the DNC, the Clinton/Podesta coven, the SJW's, the PC commissars on campuses, and the rest of their kind are the intellectual and often the ethnic heirs of the bolsheviks. If Clinton had won, they would have gone to work crucifying the decent half of this country out of sheer malice.

In the movie Absolute Power, Clint Eastwood's character catches the guy who put Clint's daughter in the hospital, while the guy's in the act of trying to finish her off in her bed. The bad guy pleads "Have mercy!".

This is widely held view by the alt-right that is amazingly historically ignorant. America has always been made up of many different peoples because it was colonized by many different places. The spanish were here first. Remember?

Listening to Glenn Cuck right now (I was hoping that he would finally go ahead and pay that tribute to Kurt Cobain that he threatened to do in his DJ days).No slur in his speech, but it's a drunk ramble. No tears yet though.

I guess many people have said that before. But I want to admit that Mr. Beale never doubted about the Trumpslide, even when polls showed that Hillary was far ahead.

Today my (South European) country has awaken with the HORROR!!! Our journalists only follow USA progressive press and our people only follow our journalists. Both of them are STUNNED and AFRAID. Both the right and the left are amazed that American people have elected Hitler.

Some headlines: "Times of darkness", "God forbids America"...

I have been preparing my family for months and now they see the truth. They consider me as a kind of guru of politics, because I transmit the information included in the alt-right blogs (this information is very difficult to find in my language).

But I have to admit that I doubted. A Trumpslide? With all the media against Trump? With the polls very badly? We'll see, we'll see.

Not a conspiracy, dh, a consensus. A consensus arises when similar people, from similar backgrounds and educations, see similar problems and issues, similarly, and come up with similar solutions and courses of action. A consensus doesn't necessarily rule out minor conspiracies among discreet groups of members of the consensus (see, forex, "hide the decline" and "The medieval warming period must go") but neither does it generally rely upon them.

I don't want to sound like a singer with only one note, except that, well, I am. I never trusted the polls or the pollsters for the simple reason that, had the polls been honest, the press would not have reported them.

The press is the enemy. The Dems, and the traitors within the GOP, would be as weak and helpless, without the Press, as Sauron without the One Ring.

" I still believe the election was rigged, they just couldn't rig it big enough to counter the Trumpslide. No way Hilary got as many votes as she did to make it as close as it was."

Good Lord! The rigging was open and obvious! In the Commonwealth of Virginia, the Democrat Governor illegally and unconstitutionally restored voting rights to felons that he released from jail in order to throw the Virginia electoral votes to Clinton! And got away with it!

" 82. Blogger dh November 09, 2016 8:40 AM ...Trumps most hard line opposition in the entire race was from the political consultant class, who have the most to lose. Trump didn't use any of it. He used his own deep data firm from overseas, he used almost no polling, he used no big money contributions, and his PACs were basically cut lose from his campaign (the way the law is supposed to work). The consultant class and the media bet big against Trump and have lost totally. This election shows strongly that the message is what matters - money is a deep and distant second way down the line. All of Clinton's oodles of money and connections and the network of operatives were not able to counteract a powerful message. "

If the message was the clincher then the man was the message. Trump has Game with a capital G.

That coupled with a public that is connected like no other in history. The models didn't work because they saw voters as only living in location based communities rather than also living in global online communities that occupy just as much if not more time and mind-space than their face to face lives. Hundreds of thousands if not millions of like-minded people have found each other online, Where previously they thought themselves alone now they know they are not.

Thousands of Elijahs talk to thousands of remnant groups that didn't bend their knee to Baal and they do so everyday.

Over the last few years they have begun to work together for real world goals. If the internet goes down they will find each other if they have to. But the most important thing is how the formation of these communities has created gut level identities in the minds of the members.

But ultimately, the models didn't work because they can't measure the Holy Spirit.

> Haven't seen the breakdowns, but if commenters are correct and boomers made the difference in this election, then I'm proud to be a boomer for the first time.

Hmm. Nah, I'll pass. While I've never claimed to be a boomer, they do claim me, and they have way too much to atone for. We'll have to see how much a Trump Presidency does before we can gauge how much atonement it qualifies as.

> dh saw the election as just a linear extension of previous elections.

Well, that's part of the problem. Elections aren't, by their very nature, linear. In ideal form, they're essentially contests of two opposing philosophies as espoused by their two chosen candidates. Whoever communicates their philosophy in such a way as to connect with the most voters wins. If there's no big philosophical divide (as there often isn't), then usually the most likeable candidate wins. In this case there was a clear philosophical divide, and the one which resonated with the majority of the states won.

Watching the meltdown on CNN last night was fucking fantastic. That ass clown Van Jones was all over the emotional spectrum, ranting about how The Don had to reach out to the liberals and be nice to them, and the next sulking about how bad the libs were at getting minorities out to vote.

@31 "If this race has shown us anything, it's just how interlocked the "elite" are at many different levels. While obvious felony breaches of security may not gain a lot of traction with the majority of people, the pedophilia certainly will. Lock them up in general population as convicted pedophiles and let nature take its course."

I disagree on two points; first,I want these criminals to spend YEARS locked up knowing they brought it on themselves.

Second, I completely 100% disagree that there is ANY CRIME in this country, this NATION (hell, on this PLANET!), for which the punishment is rape by vicious black animals! And I disagree that it is ever a thing WE should accept or allow!

It speaks volumes about the black animals (on the other hand: animals are animals, you mustn't expect human behavior from them) -- but it ALSO speak volumes about the people who allow, abet, and ignore it!

This is widely held view by the alt-right that is amazingly historically ignorant. America has always been made up of many different peoples because it was colonized by many different places. The spanish were here first. Remember?

@79 "Truly these people are reprehensible; now's the time to excoriate their asses and never let up."

Fair play and good sportsmanship are (broadly) Anglo things and only make sense when both teams are on board. Our enemies are are a variegated collection of anti-American/anti-Western radicals and parasitical invaders bound together by two things: hatred of European civilization (including America) and love of the shower of money that naive European peoples continue to shower upon them. There must be no gentlemanly hand extended to help them back up when they are down. Kick them again, and again, and again, until they are out of our lands.

I don't know about the models, or this and that. I am not an expert in statistics. I do know people. In my anecdotal analysis:

1. There were a lot of people who decided in the last few days. 2. One was me. I am a NeverTrumper. In the voting booth, I pressed the button for the Constitution Party. Then I looked at Mike Pence's name, and realized he was the person I respected most on either side. I looked at Hillary and figured, well, she's going to win, but I want my vote to matter. So I switched it to Trump and that one was registered.

Roger Hill wrote:I know it is not much of a sample size, but nearly every Trump supporter I spoke with about the polling over the last month or so said essentially the same thing: I don't even bother to answer poll calls anymore.

And although I don't know whether it is helpful to ones cause, I hung up or misled every pollster who called the house.

Is it just me or was there not an incredibly high number of robo calls and pollsters out this election season?I stopped answering polls/surveys over a decade ago.*ring* ''Hello, this is not a sales call, I'm conducting a survey...''*click* ''Survey the dial tone''.The robo-calls have also been going on for over a decade (the first one I remember was from Please Clap when he was running for his second term as Gov). Charities and businesses can no longer use robo-dialers to run recorded messages - but guess who exempted themselves from that?And yes, Trump (and his family) did plenty of 'em too.

Now I have to go out and buy a Luchador mask for my new live game show.

"So scared!" "What will I tell my children in the morning??"

Sorry Timmy you won't be flooded with low IQ 3rdworlders.

I really hope that President Trump and Rosie can work out their differences and become friends again. I want her to sing the national anthem at the inauguration.

Don't you know what happens after the fat lady signs?

There was apparently literally a glass ceiling they were going to smash in NYC last night at her rally site. Literally a glass ceiling that was going to be smashed.

I believe the women would be that stupid. Too bad they didn't do it all the shards embedded in their skin would make them understand why the UVA hoax was so bad.

I was in fact yesterday fearful that the conventional wisdom was correct.

I was fearful we couldn't overcome the voter fraud. The left might have tried to double the census as numbers of voters in inner city controlled districts.

Trump's win while simultaneously keeping up with the popular vote totals that show a slight HRC margin right now

Obama did tell illegals it was safe for them to vote.

Also... we live in a world where both Micheal Moore.. and Vox Day... were actually correct in their American

Moore didn't actually make a prediction he was just trashing white people, you have to listen to the whole thing to get it. People have also edited it to be a TRUMP ad.

Fair play and good sportsmanship are (broadly) Anglo things and only make sense when both teams are on board.

I have been trying to tell people for years that the dancing in the streets when something like Brenden Eich gets fired as CEO from the company he created over a $2000 donation to a campaign that won would cause the nice tea party people to become remorseless.

Think our BKBG already has THAT one sewn up! (AND a TV career with it!)

No no I wont be handling deportations, I will be busy enough once TRUMPs DOJ identifies traitors & blackmailed pols with the "Don't Garrote Fewer Felons Than A Faggot", after the Soros clan we might not even be able to get thru the federal level people that have Epstein videos in the first year. I think TRUMP could get some concessions from Putin if he was a celebrity contestant when the Soros clan goes.

"You mealy-mouthed jerk. Nobody here will any longer afford your nonsense any degree of respect, assuming they ever did so in the first place."

Since when did I ever seek your respect? I Don't Care.

Immigrants are not invaders, especially if there are allocations made by the host country and generally agreed upon by its citizens at that time those allocations were made to enable these groups of people to come over. Certainly, those allocations are subject to revision.

"Pejorative? You bet. Ad hominems? Absolutely. Do I care? We.Don't.Care."

By the way, I went to an elite classical school. I am getting the sense from past and present classmates that evil was present there. I also remembered today that my uncle, who taught languages at the same school well before my time -- and who my mother always kept away from me, thank christ -- was a serial pedophile rapist, and he happened to belonged to a nearby *infernal* artfag society. He never went to prison, as far as I know. Just got transferred to different schools. One of his buddies from that infernal society was still volunteering at the cafeteria cash register by the time I arrived, smiling at all the kids.

These sick fucks are diabolically clever. They infiltrated elite schools so that they could farm generations of allies and successors. And victims, too, probably. Ugh.

I would suggest the long term plan should be a "Blue Boycott". Simply refuse to spend any money or do any business in any "Blue" county that voted for Clinton in this election. Not even buying a cup of coffee if you must drive through these areas.

This is going to be a slow and difficult process (disentangling yourselves from Blue based businesses will take some time), but believe me, strangling the small business and small donors at the bottom of the Progressive food chain is going to have long term effects.

"Import substitution" by local small business in Red counties will have a profound effect on local economies and be the engine that drives American economic growth in the next 8 years. Strangulation of "Blue" small business takes out their economic base, deprives them of organizers and volunteers and eventually makes their talent pool of electable candidates for any office smaller as well. The "elites" may be insulated by their accumulated wealth and protected behind gaged communities, but their base of supporters will become disconnected as there are fewer and fewer crumbs to throw to their minority and poor voting base and their brownshirt armies of BLM and other rabbles. (Of course, forcing them to start paying out of their own pockets is also a good long term strategy).

So now we have the conditions to effect change, make the most of them. Boycott Blue!

I don't believe the polls were so much 'wrong' as they were improperly weighted, whether by ignorance or intention.

I believe when we get some final demographic data that the results will line up very closely to what the polls had. i.e. blacks voted for HRC at X%, non-college educated voted for Trump at Y%, etc. It was the ASSEMBLY of the data that was in error, not the acquisition of the data.

Now we've known that media polls are just that--media--and now given the clear and irrefutable evidence from wikileaks of media collusion with the DNC, I think its a fair assessment to make that the poll numbers were purposefully weighted early to favor Clinton. And I think this was to create a preference cascade for her, to get voters to side with her because everyone wants to be on the side of the winner, and to demoralize potential Trump supporters.

Folks, I am just struck by all the machinery of politics in which Clinton appeared to have an advantage in this election. She had more money, a big “super PAC.” Way more advertising. A sophisticated data operation built on the successful experience of the Obama campaign. And none of those things seem to have made the difference.

To be indelicate, you can't polish a turd. They did a great job of putting the best possible version of the candidate in front of the people, and the people rejected her. Some by voting Trump, 3-4% by voting third party, and probably at least that many by staying home.

Pollsters are always fighting the last war. Their models are always based on who voted the last time. Didn't they buy the line from their own hero, Obama, who promised "transformational change" across America? A man who has done his level best to upset the very demographic distribution that the pollsters depend upon?

Worse still, the media types increasingly throw every discussion aside to focus exclusively on "the horse race". I had the news networks on all weekend before the election. Every show on every channel had exactly one focus and one focus only: the polls. That's it. If any issue came up at all it only did so in the context of how it affected the polls.

They use the polls to craft and advance a narrative. Polls then become not a measure of popular sentiment, but a tool to fashion it. Frankly, if a pollster comes calling, you should politely refuse them at best, or hang up on them cold.

Why hand ammo to your enemies? They are going to use that information to figure out how to work against you. Guaranteed.

And shamelessly lie to their faces. If they want to spread a false narrative, then throw sand in the gears. I am starting to suspect that many people told pollsters they were voting Libertarian or Green simply to feed *dezinformatsiya* into the system. They knew the polls were being played, so why not demoralize the pollsters, their political masters and the media charlatans who want to play you?

I usually don't like his show, but have been listening today. It's better than usual. Maybe i've become too redpilled, but he seems to hold way back, and act ignorant of what causes things when I'm certain he knows the answer

@53-Social "scientists" have a word for that, which talking heads kept chirping last night like parrots. I won't repeat it, because I won't give them the satisfaction and because I can't remember it. Also, no need to give a fancy name to what is merely common sense.

@58-You're right. The chattering class today is talking almost exclusively about stuff that doesn't matter, for instance Trump working with Congress. They do mention SCOTUS, which is important and hints at the main line of battle. The enemy is the Permanent Government. That's what Trump is up against. Well, that and the media, the foundations, the universities, etc. But first things first.

Winning the election was of vital importance, because if you're not in there you're not in there; so he other guy is. But winning barely gets you started, because we're not really a democracy. That's mostly public relations. People realize this, which is why they take the SCOTUS issue so seriously. SCOTUS is the Permanent Government personified.

One common thread in all the morning-after "Who could have foreseen XYZ" pieces is this:

We could. We foresaw many aspects of this. And they'll say, "Well, yeah, but you guys were in love with Trump, so naturally you said he would do great with women and blacks and you just got lucky when he did."

No, we held those positions for reasons we could articulate. We knew Trump's pussy-grabbing talk wouldn't hurt him with women because we understand women and the way they react to alphas. We observed the reactions in the women around us. If we needed practical evidence, we could point to Bill Philanderer-in-Chief Clinton himself, whose antics never seemed to hurt him with women. There were solid reasons to think Trump was fine with women.

The experts could have known all these things too, had they been open to them -- plus they had their data on top of it! Their data should have confirmed that there was no female anti-Trump surge, yet they continued to misinterpret the data to suggest that there was one.

Either that or women were lying to them because they thought they should be offended. That's possible. But again, that's where a pollster needs to make his money: the assumptions he uses to process the data need to reflect reality, or he just compounds the errors.

Yep, that was the theory, and a lot of experts believed it and based their predictions on it. As Scott Adams might say: when your model tells you there's a pink elephant in the room, but you can't find it no matter how hard you look, maybe it's time for a new model.